The Terms Of The Securities Law Lag Behind "Mercy" And "Soft Hands" Must Be Corrected.

Fu Ying, spokesman for the five session of the twelve National People's Congress, said recently that according to the current arrangement, the Securities Law (revised bill) in April this year should be re submitted to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress for deliberation.

There are three main points in the revision of the Securities Law: first, decentralization and decentralization, to promote marketization, and to promote the market to play a decisive role in the allocation of resources in the securities market.

Two, deregulation, encouraging innovation and promoting the development of the securities industry.

Three is to strengthen supervision and law enforcement, and strengthen the protection of investors, especially small and medium-sized investors' legitimate rights and interests.

According to the procedure, after the three trial, the revised Securities Law will be formally promulgated and implemented.

The securities law is the fundamental law of China's capital market, and its role of "programmatic" is unquestionable.

However, since the implementation of the securities act in 1997, the securities law has not been able to adapt to the extraordinary development of China's capital market for a long time.

Therefore, many provisions of the securities law tend to lag behind.

It hinders the development of capital market and fails to protect the interests of investors.

The securities law has been brought to the second instance or even the three instance at an early date. It is not only necessary but also in line with the expectations and demands of the market.

From the media coverage, the first draft of the securities law has 16 chapters and 338 articles, including 122 new articles, 185 amendments and 22 articles deleted.

For example, registration, securities business permit sale.

Representative litigation has become a highlight.

However, in any case, the amendments to the securities law should face up to three aspects.

One is that the amendment of the securities law can no longer leave loopholes in the system.

The existing securities law was revised in October 2005, and it has been eight years since it was promulgated and implemented in 1997.

It has been more than 11 years since 2005.

Since the revision of the securities law is longer, the relevant provisions should be forward-looking and can not leave loopholes in the system again.

For example, for fraudulent issuance, according to the current "

"Regulations" are often "punished".

This is also the reason why companies such as Wan Fu Sheng Ke, Xin Tai electric and other enterprises dare to fake listing in recent years, and in fact constitute the "motive force" of these enterprises' counterfeiting and listing.

Then the revised Securities Law should stipulate that the listing of counterfeiting companies will be delisted, and there must be no more lucky ones like Wan Fusheng.

With this rigid rule, counterfeiters will at least weigh the costs and consequences of fraud.

Second, the low cost of violation must be eliminated.

The low cost of violation is a major institutional defect in China's capital market, and its harmfulness is self-evident.

In recent years, the chairman of the SFC has been tightening up supervision. However, due to the limitations of the securities law, the violation of the securities law is often punishing even if it is punishing the top penalty.

The third is investor protection.

Just like information disclosure.

As a big and difficult problem in the market, the problem of investor protection is also a big problem in the market.

Although the regulatory authorities have done a lot in protecting investors, the effect is still limited. The fundamental reason is that there is no real escort of the securities law.

For example, the long appealed class action system has not yet been shown.

The draft amendment to the securities law is only representative of litigation, which is not essentially different from that of a lawyer who currently suffers from the loss of interest in false statements by a listed company.

I believe that only the class action system is really a "sharp weapon" to protect the legitimate rights and interests of small and medium-sized investors.

Without the class action system, any shouting of investor protection is of little practical significance.

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats net report.